Intelligent Design

[AAA]

[Lemonvariable72]

What's the best way to refute the argument that we were intelligently designed? I've seen the bit that Neil Degrasse Tyson did on it, but what else can I put into my arsenal? (More specifically, about how complex flowers are and other things in nature)

Why did god run the sewage through a fun park? Better yet, if were perfectly designed then why the do I have nipples? (I'm a man)

[AAA]

Actually the fact that you think evolutionists don't have presuppositions shows your misunderstanding of the character of scientists.

My dear, ignorant child.  The only thing you are proving is your ignorance of science.  By all means, continue along this road and see just how far you get within reason.

You guys really like to put yourselves up on a pedestal and prance about as though you have this elite knowledge, don't you? What am I so ignorant about?

[AAA]

Actually the fact that you think evolutionists don't have presuppositions shows your misunderstanding of the character of scientists.

All scientists have presuppositions, which they then test against reality. Why is this so hard?

Right, but they interpret the results through their worldview. 

What does the fact that photolyase exists mean to you? it had a necessary function, therefore it arose over many chance events.

 What does it mean to me? A designer built in a way for our bodies to protect their genome in spite of the energy rich UV waves from our environment.

Do you see how the same result is interpreted differently based on our presuppositions? Do you disagree with this phenomenon?

[Kitan Etos]

What am I so ignorant about?

Religion.

You see it is some divine answer, when it is neither divine nor an answer.

Mythology shall always be just that; an elaborate, yet primitive, answer to that which denies reality for its own stubbornness.

[AAA]

It's not ignorance. It isn't "we can't explain it, so God" It is "we know of only one cause that is capable of explaining the specified sequences and other features of life and the universe, and that cause is intelligence." You are relying on faith to think that another cause will arise.

Wrong.

You don't know jack shit about the universe, therefore you aren't qualified to weigh in on "cause". The world's best astrophysicists and evolutionary biologists don't know comparably much of the whole picture, which is why they are used to saying "I don't know" when that is fact. You can't imagine a better answer than your god answer, and it's so important to you that you will strut arrogantly into a science classroom with your pre-conceived idea, attempting (as Kitan pointed out) to make science conform to that idea, and this is not how science is done. You cannot call anything you like "science", and the bullshit you spew makes no more sense than the idea that it was created by invisible pink unicorns.

Actually I think if you read the posts from you and the others, you will see that they are the ones strutting around arrogantly as masters of logic and reasoning.
 Also I didn't always think intelligent design. I accepted evolution for a while, and it wasn't until I began to understand DNA, RNA, and proteins that I began to see the problems with it.

[The Valkyrie]

My dear, ignorant child.  The only thing you are proving is your ignorance of science.  By all means, continue along this road and see just how far you get within reason.

You guys really like to put yourselves up on a pedestal and prance about as though you have this elite knowledge, don't you? What am I so ignorant about?

Science. 

Prancing on a pedestal is a good way to fall off.

I just stand still on my pedestal and let everyone else bask in my glorious light.

[Rhondazvous]

Actually the fact that you think evolutionists don't have presuppositions shows your misunderstanding of the character of scientists.

All scientists have presuppositions, which they then test against reality. Why is this so hard?

And all creationists have presuppositions which they test against previous presuppositions. They even test reality against their presuppositions. And that is the principle difference between science and religion.

[AAA]

But why shouldn't I infer designer to the system I described?

Due to the fact that there is nothing to infer a designer.

Science has no problems stating "I don't know".

Only religion and intelligent design jumps to the erroneous conclusion of "I have the answer, and it's god."

It's not like they are just saying it's god for the sake of saying that. There are very good reasons to think an intelligence did it, which you ignored.

[The Grand Nudger]

Quadrupling down on your lie, now.  I can't actually decide whether or not I want you to stop.  It's a slow night otherwise. You couldn't have accepted evolution, ever, you don't know what it is.